Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Update contrib.admin.models.LogEntryManager #2423

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Dec 7, 2024
Merged

Update contrib.admin.models.LogEntryManager #2423

merged 4 commits into from
Dec 7, 2024

Conversation

JaeHyuckSa
Copy link
Contributor

I have made things!

Related issues

sobolevn
sobolevn reviewed Oct 26, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@sobolevn sobolevn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please, make log_action as deprecated: https://github.com/django/django/blob/373cb3037fe4e67adbac9ac43340391e859aa957/django/contrib/admin/models.py#L39

and type queryset: Queryset[] type param.

@JaeHyuckSa
Copy link
Contributor Author

JaeHyuckSa commented Oct 27, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Please, make log_action as deprecated: https://github.com/django/django/blob/373cb3037fe4e67adbac9ac43340391e859aa957/django/contrib/admin/models.py#L39

and type queryset: Queryset[] type param.

I often come across methods marked with RemovedInDjango60Warning in Django, and it seems these aren’t fully addressed in django-stubs yet — or is there something I might be missing? Would it be better to handle these using a deprecated decorator, or should we add a category to the allowlist?

If you could provide some guidance, I’ll go ahead and create a PR to address this more thoroughly.

@JaeHyuckSa
Update django.contrib.admin.models.LogEntryManager
3ca4a90 
Signed-off-by: SaJH <wogur981208@gmail.com>
@sobolevn
Copy link
Member

Would it be better to handle these using a deprecated decorator

Yes, I think that we should apply this decorator.

@JaeHyuckSa JaeHyuckSa mentioned this pull request Dec 6, 2024
Merged
@JaeHyuckSa
Copy link
Contributor Author

JaeHyuckSa commented Dec 6, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Would it be better to handle these using a deprecated decorator

Yes, I think that we should apply this decorator.

The suggested changes have been applied. -> #2458

@sobolevn
Copy link
Member

sobolevn commented Dec 6, 2024

This now has merge conflicts :(

@JaeHyuckSa
Copy link
Contributor Author

This now has merge conflicts :(

I resolved the conflict.

@JaeHyuckSa
Add overload decorator for log_actions to clarify return types
4f51b95 
Signed-off-by: SaJH <wogur981208@gmail.com>
sobolevn
sobolevn approved these changes Dec 7, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@sobolevn sobolevn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you!

@sobolevn sobolevn merged commit 9d6c8f4 into typeddjango:master Dec 7, 2024
40 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@sobolevn sobolevn sobolevn approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@JaeHyuckSa @sobolevn